Connect with us

Daily Caller

Now that Trump is president-elect, who could serve in his administration?

Published

7 minute read

From The Center Square

By 

Former President Donald Trump has secured the White House, now raising the question: who will serve in his administration?

Trump admitted on the Joe Rogan podcast just before the election that one of his biggest mistakes in his first term was putting the wrong people around him, a critique that has been widely shared by Trump’s own supporters.

Now, Trump has another chance to stock his administration.

Trump announced Thursday that his campaign co-chair Susie Wiles would serve as White House chief of staff, a powerful, wide-ranging position where she will help form the new administration and steer its policies.

A range of Republican establishment picks are jockeying to lead the U.S. Treasury Department, State Department, Department of Defense and others, but here are a few of the highest profile potential picks to serve in Trump’s administration.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

Lifelong Democrat RFK Jr. ran for president as a Democrat and then became an Independent before finally backing the Trump campaign. Trump repeatedly touted Kennedy’s endorsement, saying that Kennedy would be kept far from energy policy because of his liberal views but would be allowed to work on health issues.

Kennedy has declared a war on junk food and speaks passionately about chronic health issues and how the American food industry and the Food and Drug Administration policies have helped create the chronic disease epidemic in the U.S.

RFK is considered a likely leader in the administration, probably in a health role. RFK has recently publicly said that “entire departments” at the FDA need to go because they are failing or even doing harm.

“They’re not protecting our kids,” he told MSNBC in a recent interview. “Why do we have Fruit Loops in this country that have 18 or 19 ingredients and you go to Canada and it’s got two or three?”

Elon Musk

Musk gave Trump a full-throated endorsement and helped propel him to victory with his posts on X and his financial backing. WHile Musk is more than busy running several successful companies, Trump publicly said he would pick Musk to improve government efficiency.

Musk gained a reputation in that department when he bought Twitter, fired much of the staff, and still kept the company running. Musk expressed surprise at just how inefficient and wasteful Twitter was when he took over.

“I will create a government efficiency commission tasked with conducting a complete financial and performance audit of the entire federal government,” Trump said in September.

Tulsi Gabbard

Gabbard served as a Democrat in Congress but later backed Trump on the campaign trail. Gabbard is known for her foreign policy chops and military service, potentially positioning her for an ambassadorship or State Department position.

Gabbard told Fox News in September that she would be “honored” to serve in Trump’s administration. The same month, she also told a crowd at the Georgia Faith and Freedom Coalition that she could help Trump prevent WWIII and deal with the military industrial complex.

“I feel I can make the most impact in these areas of national security and foreign policy, and work to bring about the changes that President Trump talks about,” she said in her speech.

Vivek Ramaswamy

During the Republican presidential primary, billionaire and former Republican presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy quickly built his popularity and reputation as an erudite speaker and younger mouthpiece for many of Trump’s ideas.

He also refrained from attacking the President-elect and called for abolishing the Department of Education. He could oversee the dismantling of that agency or be placed somewhere in the Commerce Department or elsewhere, where his business background would serve him well.

Notably, Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine, a Republican, will now need to appoint a U.S. senator to replace Vice President-Elect J.D. Vance. Ramaswamy lives in Ohio and could make the cut.

Scott Jennings

Scott Jennings has gone viral online in recent days for his commentary on CNN where he clearly defined Trump’s victory as a coalition of working class people as the mostly liberal panelists fretted over Trump’s victory.

Several viral clips have led to preliminary calls for Jennings to serve as press secretary.

“Scott Jennings = strong candidate for White House press secretary or communications director,” Real Clear Investigations senior reporter and New York Post columnist Paul Sperry wrote on X, one of several to make the same point. “He has been excellent throughout this campaign, arguing effectively as the lone GOP voice on a hostile, biased CNN panel, while keeping his cool and class.”

U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla.

Sen. Marco Rubio was considered on the short list for vice president. While Trump will need the support in the Senate, Rubio could be repurposed in a position that utilizes his focus on national defense.

North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum

Burgum was also considered a vice president contender. His wealth and business background could put him on the short list for the Small Business Administration or another economic-related role in the new Trump administration.

John Ratcliffe

Former lawmaker and congressman Ratcliffe served as director of National Intelligence and is considered a potential pick to serve as attorney general.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Daily Caller

What Happened in Butler, PA?

Published on

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Mariane Angela

Former State Department official Mike Benz raised serious concerns on Fox News Monday about the events surrounding the shooting in Butler, Pa., asking whether federal law enforcement played a more significant role than originally reported.

It’s been a year since the shooting of President Donald Trump at his rally in Butler, and while investigations have shed light on the incident, several critical questions remain unanswered. During an appearance on “The Will Cain Show,” Benz said he believes the lack of transparency in the case has led to many critical questions remaining unanswered.

“So the question is, if Crooks was cultivated or if he was being monitored or potentially interacted with by federal law enforcement agents who put him onto that? And I think that the total lack of transparency, it’s sort of defying the laws of surveillance state physics,” Benz said. “I think most people believe that if federal law enforcement were to get ahold of their phone, that pretty much everything could be scraped from it. You don’t know if, for example, in this case, he was communicating with a foreign government.”

Benz then raised concerns that the investigation into the Butler shooting could extend beyond the FBI and Department of Homeland Security (DHS), suggesting that agencies like the National Security Agency (NSA) might be involved in cracking encrypted communications.

WATCH:

“This, to me, may go beyond, you know, FBI, DHS. We know that the NSA is able to crack these sorts of things. And so it’s all very strange to me,” Benz said. “But, again, there’s another whistleblower report that I believe Josh Hawley’s whistleblower mentioned, which was that HSI [Homeland Security Investigation] agents kind of mysteriously replaced a fair number of Secret Service agents that day because Secret Service was said to be split between the NATO summit and Jill Biden being away.”

Benz referred to what he called a troubling series of events leading up to the Butler shooting.

“And that Secret Service had denied, I think, about 10 requests for additional security from the Trump campaign prior to the shooting. And so it is just a strange confluence of variables that just do not sit well for the American public,” Benz said. “And I think that there should be a sort of transparency task force so that these specific questions about HSI and the potential recruiting as an informant about the contents of the phone and the like can be answered.”

A report released Sept. 2024 uncovered whistleblower allegations about the Secret Service’s security failures during the attempted assassination of Trump in Butler. The office of Republican Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri published the whistleblower report and revealed previously undisclosed claims about the DHS and Secret Service committing multiple failures.

Whistleblowers allege that the agent in charge of the Butler rally failed a key examination during federal training and was considered “low-caliber.” The report also said that the Secret Service’s intelligence units were absent from the rally, which contributed to communication failures between law enforcement agencies.

Senior U.S. Secret Service officials were aware of a “classified threat” to Trump’s life 10 days before the July 13, 2024 assassination attempt but failed to inform the agents protecting him. A report from the Government Accountability Office said Sunday that the intelligence, presented to Secret Service leadership, never reached the field team due to a “siloed practice for sharing classified information.”

(Featured Image Media Credit: Screenshot/Fox News)
Continue Reading

Daily Caller

USAID Quietly Sent Thousands Of Viruses To Chinese Military-Linked Biolab

Published on

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Emily Kopp

The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) shipped thousands of viral samples to a lab in Wuhan over the course of a 10-year program even though it had no formal agreement with the lab in place, according to previously unreported documents.

The documents show that USAID funded the exportation of 11,000 samples from Yunnan Province, where some of the closest relatives of the COVID-19 virus circulate, to Wuhan, the epicenter of the pandemic, with no apparent plan for ensuring the samples were not misdirected to bioweapons and remained accessible to the U.S. government.

$210 million USAID public health program called PREDICT, steered by the University of California-Davis, collected viral samples in countries throughout the globe but lacked long-term storage when funding dried up, according to rudimentary plans in 2019.

Dear Readers:

As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.

Please consider making a small donation of any amount here.

Thank you!

USAID’s sample dispensation plan for China is sparse: “No need [sic] information from Yunnan. They were never an official lab partner for PREDICT. All samples they helped collected [sic] are sent to, tested, and stored in Wuhan.”

The “lab” refers to the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV). WIV was a close partner of USAID contractor EcoHealth Alliance and a slated partner for a PREDICT-like program supported by the State Department. The lab has poor biosafety practices and ties to the People’s Liberation Army (PLA). 

One of the closest known relatives of the COVID virus is among the viruses sampled with USAID funding.

“Investigations involving USAID’s former funding of global health awards remain active and ongoing,” a senior State Department official said in a statement to the Daily Caller News Foundation. “The American people can rest assured knowing that under the Trump Administration we will not be funding these controversial programs.”

The internal documents were obtained through a FOIA lawsuit brought by U.S. Right to Know, a nonprofit newsroom and public health research group.

The shuttering of USAID – which was officially completed Tuesday – has ignited a debate about its net impact on global health. A study in The Lancet projected an association between a dropoff in USAID funding and 14 million deaths based on an epidemiological model.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in a statement Tuesday that USAID spending has often undermined rather than strengthened American interests.

“Beyond creating a globe-spanning NGO industrial complex at taxpayer expense, USAID has little to show since the end of the Cold War,” Rubio said. “Development objectives have rarely been met, instability has often worsened, and anti-American sentiment has only grown.”

The now-defunct agency’s connection to the Wuhan lab complicates its global health legacy.

“The USAID $210 million contract for PREDICT should have included contractual terms that required all samples, or at least copies of all samples, be transferred to and stored by a US government facility,” said Rutgers University molecular biologist Richard Ebright told the DCNF. “The PREDICT grift did none of this.”

UC Davis did not respond to a request for comment. The State Department did not respond to a request for comment.

Did USAID Fund COVID’s Ancestor?

Many of the viruses stored at the lab in Wuhan may have been sampled with U.S. funding yet remain out of reach for U.S. government entities investigating the origins of COVID.

The samples were set to be preserved for testing – with human samples preserved for 10 years – the documents show. But the documents suggest that requirement was never incorporated into a formal contract with USAID.

The two scientists supervising the samples were: Ben Hu, a virologist at the WIV, who reportedly became sick with COVID-like symptoms in 2019; and Peter Daszak, a scientist who was debarred from federal funding after the U.S. government deemed him a threat to public safety for inadequate oversight of the research in Wuhan.

Hu and Daszak did not reply to requests for comment.

The documents show PREDICT contractors discussing viral samples taken from wildlife and stored in India, Liberia, Malaysia, the Republic of Congo and China. Some of the samples were stored in virus-transport media (VTM), which allows researchers to store live viruses for later use in the lab.

“It’s not rocket science to require a contract and supporting paperwork which establishes a relationship, testing protocol, and chain of custody, when one is sending out lab samples,” said Reuben Guttman, a partner at Guttman, Buschner & Brooks PLLC who specializes in ensuring the integrity of government programs, in an interview with the DCNF. “In any scientific endeavor, you need confidence in your results. That requires paperwork to prove your methodology is sound.”

Continue Reading

Trending

X